Updated Management of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Scientific Advances Driving Modern Therapeutic Innovations.

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States and accounts for an estimated 1 million deaths annually worldwide. The liver is the most common site of metastatic spread from colorectal cancer, significantly driving both morbidity and mortality. Although remarkable advances have been made in recent years in the management for patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases, significant challenges remain in early detection, prevention of progression and recurrence, and in the development of more effective therapeutics. In 2017, our group held a multidisciplinary state-of-the-science symposium to discuss the rapidly evolving clinical and scientific advances in the field of colorectal liver metastases, including novel early detection and prognostic liquid biomarkers, identification of high-risk cohorts, advances in tumor-immune therapy, and different regional and systemic therapeutic strategies. Since that time, there have been scientific discoveries translating into therapeutic innovations addressing the current management challenges. These innovations are currently reshaping the treatment paradigms and spurring further scientific discovery. Herein, we present an updated discussion of both the scientific and clinical advances and future directions in the management of colorectal liver metastases, including adoptive T-cell therapies, novel blood-based biomarkers, and the role of the tumor microbiome. In addition, we provide a comprehensive overview detailing the role of modern multidisciplinary clinical approaches used in the management of patients with colorectal liver metastases, including considerations toward specific molecular tumor profiles identified on next generation sequencing, as well as quality of life implications for these innovative treatments.

Tucatinib plus trastuzumab for chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-positive, RAS wild-type unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer (MOUNTAINEER): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: HER2 is an actionable target in metastatic colorectal cancer. We assessed the activity of tucatinib plus trastuzumab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-positive, RAS wild-type unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: MOUNTAINEER is a global, open-label, phase 2 study that enrolled patients aged 18 years and older with chemotherapy-refractory, HER2-positive, RAS wild-type unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer at 34 sites (clinics and hospitals) in five countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, and the USA). Initially, the study was designed as a single-cohort study, which was expanded following an interim analysis to include more patients. Initially, patients were given tucatinib (300 mg orally twice daily) plus intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg as an initial loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 21 days; cohort A) for the duration of treatment (until progression), and after expansion, patients were randomly assigned (4:3), using an interactive web response system and stratified by primary tumour location, to either tucatinib plus trastuzumab (cohort B) or tucatinib monotherapy (cohort C). The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate per blinded independent central review (BICR) for cohorts A and B combined and was assessed in patients in the full analysis set (ie, patients with HER2-positive disease who received at least one dose of study treatment). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043313, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 8, 2017, and Sept 22, 2021, 117 patients were enrolled (45 in cohort A, 41 in cohort B, and 31 in cohort C), of whom 114 patients had locally assessed HER2-positive disease and received treatment (45 in cohort A, 39 in cohort B, and 30 in cohort C; full analysis set), and 116 patients received at least one dose of study treatment (45 in cohort A, 41 in cohort B, and 30 in cohort C; safety population). In the full analysis set, median age was 56·0 years (IQR 47-64), 66 (58%) were male, 48 (42%) were female, 88 (77%) were White, and six (5%) were Black or African American. As of data cutoff (March 28, 2022), in 84 patients from cohorts A and B in the full analysis set, the confirmed objective response rate per BICR was 38·1% (95% CI 27·7-49·3; three patients had a complete response and 29 had a partial response). In cohorts A and B, the most common adverse event was diarrhoea (55 [64%] of 86), the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event was hypertension (six [7%] of 86), and three (3%) patients had tucatinib-related serious adverse events (acute kidney injury, colitis, and fatigue). In cohort C, the most common adverse event was diarrhoea (ten [33%] of 30), the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase (both two [7%]), and one (3%) patient had a tucatinib-related serious adverse event (overdose). No deaths were attributed to adverse events. All deaths in treated patients were due to disease progression. INTERPRETATION: Tucatinib plus trastuzumab had clinically meaningful anti-tumour activity and favourable tolerability. This treatment is the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-HER2 regimen for metastatic colorectal cancer and is an important new treatment option for chemotherapy-refractory HER2-positive metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: Seagen and Merck & Co.

Phase 2 study of preoperative chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine followed by chemoradiation for borderline resectable or node-positive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine for potentially operable pancreatic adenocarcinoma has not been well studied in a prospective interventional trial and could down-stage tumors to achieve negative surgical margins. METHODS: A single-arm, open-label phase 2 trial (NCT02427841) enrolled patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma deemed to be borderline resectable or clinically node-positive from March 17, 2016 to October 5, 2019. Patients received preoperative gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, every 28 days for two cycles followed by chemoradiation with 50.4 Gy intensity-modulated radiation over 28 fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. After definitive resection, patients received four additional cycles of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. The primary endpoint was R0 resection rate. Other endpoints included treatment completion rate, resection rate, radiographic response rate, survival, and adverse events. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were enrolled, with the majority having head of pancreas primary tumors, both arterial and venous vasculature involvement, and clinically positive nodes on imaging. Among them, 11 (58%) underwent definitive resection and eight of 19 (42%) achieved R0 resection. Disease progression and functional decline were primary reasons for deferring surgical resection after neoadjuvant treatment. Pathologic near-complete response was observed in two of 11 (18%) resection specimens. Among the 19 patients, the 12-month progression-free survival was 58%, and 12-month overall survival was 79%. Common adverse events were alopecia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, myalgia, peripheral neuropathy, rash, and neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel followed by long-course chemoradiation represents a feasible neoadjuvant treatment strategy for borderline resectable or node-positive pancreatic cancer.

A Review of Circulating Tumor DNA as a Biomarker Guide for Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Non-operative management of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is emerging as a popular approach for patients that have no evidence of disease following neoadjuvant therapy. However, high rates of local recurrence or distant metastases have highlighted the urgent need for robust biomarker strategies to aid clinical management of these patients. METHODS: This review summarizes recent advances in the utility of cell-free (cf) and circulating tumor (ct) DNA as potential biomarkers to help guide individualized non-operative management strategies for LARC patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: Liquid biopsies and the detection of cfDNA/ctDNA is an emerging technology with the potential to provide a non-invasive approach to monitor disease response and improve the identification of patients with LARC that would best benefit from non-operative management. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial work is still needed before cfDNA/ctDNA monitoring can be widely adopted in the clinical setting. Studies reviewed herein highlight several areas of opportunity for improving the effectiveness and utility of cfDNA/ctDNA for managing patients with LARC.

Hepatectomy is associated with improved oncologic outcomes in recurrent colorectal liver metastases: A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following resection of colorectal liver metastasis, most patients have disease recurrence, most commonly intrahepatic. Although the role of resection in colorectal liver metastasis is well-established, there have been limited investigations assessing the benefit of repeat hepatic resection compared with systemic treatment alone for intrahepatic recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective single-institution cohort study of patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastasis following curative-intent hepatectomy was performed from 2003 to 2019. The oncologic outcomes, including post-recurrence overall survival, were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling. Patients undergoing repeat hepatic resection were propensity-matched with patients receiving systemic treatment alone based on relevant clinicopathologic variables. RESULTS: There were 338 patients treated with hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastasis over the study period. Liver recurrence was observed in 147 (43%) patients at a median time of 10 months from prior resection, with a median post-recurrence overall survival of 29 months. There were 37 patients managed with repeat hepatic resection; 33 (89%) received perioperative chemotherapy. On propensity matching, there were no significant clinicopathologic differences between 37 patients having repeat hepatic resection and 37 patients treated with systemic treatment alone. Repeat hepatic resection was independently associated with improved 5-year post-recurrence overall survival compared with systemic treatment alone (median overall survival 41 vs 35 months, 5-year overall survival 19% vs 3%, P = .048). CONCLUSION: Disease characteristics of patients with intrahepatic recurrence of colorectal liver metastasis, specifically the number of liver lesions and size of the largest lesion, are most predictive of survival and response to systemic therapy. Patients who recur with oligometastatic liver disease experience improved outcomes and derive benefit from curative-intent repeat hepatic resection with integrated perioperative systemic therapy.

The multidisciplinary management of cholangiocarcinoma.

Cholangiocarcinoma is a lethal malignancy of the biliary epithelium that can arise anywhere along the biliary tract. Surgical resection confers the greatest likelihood of long-term survivability. However, its insidious onset, difficult diagnostics, and resultant advanced presentation render the majority of patients unresectable, highlighting the importance of early detection with novel biomarkers. Developing liver-directed therapies and emerging targeted therapeutics may offer improved survivability for patients with unresectable or advanced disease. In this article, the authors review the current multidisciplinary standards of care in resectable and unresectable cholangiocarcinoma, with an emphasis on novel biomarkers for early detection and nonsurgical locoregional therapy options.

Application of Value Framework to Phase III Trials of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials testing immune-checkpoint inhibitors in esophago-gastric malignancies have shown mixed results. We aim to assess key subgroups using the ASCO Net Health Benefit Score (NHBS) and ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search for phase III trials of FDA-approved anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 drugs in esophago-gastric cancer trials was identified using www.clinicaltrials.gov. These published studies were scored using the ASCO NHBS and ESMO MCBS. The ASCO NHBS scores were compared by primary site of cancer (esophageal vs gastric) and PD-L1 expression using the Mann-Whitney test and the ESMO-MCBS grading, by Fisher's Exact test. RESULTS: Fifteen of 45 clinical trials were included. Of them, 6 were primarily esophageal cancer trials, and 9 were primarily gastric cancer trials. Ten stratified their analysis based on PD-L1 expression. The ASCO NHBS score was higher (mean 40, range 20 to 56.6 vs. mean 12, range -1.1 to 18.4, P < .01) for esophageal cancer than gastric cancer. No difference was observed in survival and response endpoints between the 2 groups. Similarly, the ESMO MCBS scored higher for esophageal cancer group than gastric cancer (P < .05). Additionally, the scores were higher in those with high PD-L1 expression vs. low PD-L1 (mean 36, range 11.2-66.6 vs. mean 14, range -19.5 to 43.6, P < .05). CONCLUSION: The ASCO NHB and ESMO scores were consistently higher among esophageal cancer trials than gastric cancer trials and in those with high PD-L1 expression than low expression. Histology and PD-L1 expression should be considered when discussing value of immunotherapy to patients.

Therapy Resistant Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are a heterogenous group of malignancies originating from neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal tract, the incidence of which has been increasing for several decades. While there has been significant progress in the development of therapeutic options for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, these remain limited both in quantity and durability of benefit. This review examines the latest research elucidating the mechanisms of both up-front resistance and the eventual development of resistance to the primary systemic therapeutic options including somatostatin analogues, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with lutetium Lu 177 dotatate, everolimus, sunitinib, and temozolomide-based chemotherapy. Further, potential strategies for overcoming these mechanisms of resistance are reviewed in addition to a comprehensive review of ongoing and planned clinical trials addressing this important challenge.

Comparison of neoadjuvant regimens for resectable gastroesophageal junction cancer: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials across three decades.

Background: The optimal perioperative treatment for adenocarcinoma of gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) tumor remains uncertain. The systematic review aims to assess the best neoadjuvant modality, namely chemotherapy (CT) versus chemoradiotherapy (CRT) based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for resectable gastric, esophageal and GEJ tumors. Methods: We performed a comprehensive PubMed database and Cochrane Library search to identify relevant RCTs related to neoadjuvant treatment for resectable GEJ adenocarcinoma. We included all published RCTs (phase 2 or 3) that tested specific neoadjuvant therapies (CT or CRT) if the patient population included GEJ tumors. We applied the Version 2 Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2) to all the eligible studies. Outcomes examined included R0 resection and pathological response based on intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, surgical outcomes, notable adverse events, and overall survival (OS). Each randomized group of every study was noted to be neoadjuvant CRT, CT, or surgery alone in order to compare the outcomes among these treatment approaches. Results: We identified 25 RCTs with 7,855 patients published from 1996 to 2019. Seven studies tested preoperative CT versus surgery alone, 7 tested preoperative radiotherapy (RT) or CRT versus surgery alone, 4 tested preoperative RT or CRT versus preoperative CT, and 7 tested other combinations. The R0 resection ranged 47-100% and the 3-year OS ranged 6-66.1% in all the study arms. In an exploratory analysis, CRT strategies showed a superior R0 resection rate [80.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 79.8-80.6%] to surgery alone (60.9%; 95% CI: 60.4-61.3%; P<0.01) and to preoperative CT (63.9%; 95% CI: 63.6-64.2%; P<0.01). When comparing 3- and 5-year OS, improvement was noted when comparing CRT to surgery alone (P<0.01), and perioperative CT to surgery alone (P<0.01), but no definite difference was noted between CRT versus CT. Discussion: Preoperative CRT showed improvement in R0 resection rate to surgery alone and preoperative CT. However, there is no significant difference in OS between CRT and CT. Both neoadjuvant strategies remain clinically meaningful options for patients with resectable GEJ tumors. Lack of patient-level data and inconsistent reporting of key outcomes across studies were the main limitations of our study.

Pembrolizumab Monotherapy for Previously Untreated Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Data from the Open-Label, Phase II KEYNOTE-224 Trial.

PURPOSE: KEYNOTE-224 cohort 1 demonstrated that pembrolizumab was efficacious and tolerable in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. We report results from KEYNOTE-224 (NCT02702414) cohort 2, which enrolled patients with advanced HCC and no prior systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-224 was an open-label, multicountry phase II trial. Eligible patients in cohort 2 had advanced HCC not amenable or refractory to locoregional therapy and not previously treated with systemic therapy. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for ≤2 years. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by central imaging review per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety/tolerability. RESULTS: Between September 4, 2018, and February 20, 2019, 51 patients were allocated in cohort 2. The median time from the first dose to data cutoff (January 19, 2021) was 27 months (range, 23-29). ORR was 16% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7-29] and was similar across key subgroups. Median DOR was 16 months (range, 3-24+), and DCR was 57%. The median PFS was 4 months (95% CI, 2-8), and median TTP was 4 months (95% CI, 3-9). Median OS was 17 months (95% CI, 8-23). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 16% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced HCC with no prior systemic therapy, pembrolizumab provided durable antitumor activity, promising OS, and had a safety profile consistent with previous observations. These findings support further evaluation of pembrolizumab-based regimens for HCC.

Neoadjuvant Therapy Is Associated with Improved Chemotherapy Delivery and Overall Survival Compared to Upfront Resection in Pancreatic Cancer without Increasing Perioperative Complications.

The role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and/or chemotherapy (neoCHT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poorly defined. We hypothesized that patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) would have improved systemic therapy delivery, as well as comparable perioperative complications, compared to patients undergoing upfront resection. This is an IRB-approved retrospective study of potentially resectable PDAC patients treated within an academic quaternary referral center between 2011 and 2018. Data were abstracted from the electronic medical record using an institutional cancer registry and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Three hundred and fourteen patients were eligible for analysis and eighty-one patients received NAT. The median overall survival (OS) was significantly improved in patients who received NAT (28.6 vs. 20.1 months, p = 0.014). Patients receiving neoCHT had an overall increased mean duration of systemic therapy (p < 0.001), and the median OS improved with each month of chemotherapy delivered (HR = 0.81 per month CHT, 95% CI (0.76-0.86), p < 0.001). NAT was not associated with increases in early severe post-operative complications (p = 0.47), late leaks (p = 0.23), or 30-90 day readmissions (p = 0.084). Our results show improved OS in patients who received NAT, driven largely by improved chemotherapy delivery, without an apparent increase in early or late perioperative complications compared to patients undergoing upfront resection.

Early Versus Late Recurrence in Rectal Cancer: Does Timing Matter?

BACKGROUND: The definition of early recurrence (ER) in rectal cancer is unclear, and the association of ER with post-recurrence survival (PRS) is poorly described. We therefore sought to identify if time to recurrence (TTR) is associated with PRS. METHODS: We reviewed all curative-intent resections of nonmetastatic rectal cancer from 2003 to 2018 in our institutional registry within an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Clinicopathologic data at diagnosis and first recurrence were collected and analyzed. ER was pre-specified at < 24 months and late recurrence (LR) at ≥ 24 months. PRS was evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 53 months, 61 out of 548 (11.1%) patients undergoing resection experienced recurrence. Median TTR was 14 months (IQR 10-18) with 45 of 61 patients (74%) classified as ER. There were no significant baseline differences between patients with ER and LR. Most recurrences were isolated to the liver (26%) or lung (31%), and 16% were locoregional. ER was not associated with worse PRS compared to LR (P > 0.99). On multivariable analysis, detection of recurrence via workup for symptoms, CEA > 10 ng/mL at recurrence, and site of recurrence were independently associated with PRS. CONCLUSION: ER is not associated with PRS in patients with resected rectal cancer. Symptomatic recurrences and those accompanied by CEA elevations are associated with worse PRS, while metastatic disease confined to the liver or lung is associated with improved PRS. Attention should be directed away from TTR and instead toward determining therapy for patients with treatable oligometastatic disease.

Geographic Disparities in Referral Rates and Oncologic Outcomes of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a rare cancer. Patients in rural areas may face reduced access to advanced treatments often only available at referral centers. We evaluated the association of referral center treatment with treatment patterns, outcomes, and geography in patients with ICC. METHODS: We queried the Oregon State Cancer Registry for ICC between 1997 and 2016, collecting clinicopathologic, demographic, and oncologic data. Patients were classified by treatment at a referral center or non-referral center. 'Crowfly' distance to the nearest referral center (DRC) was calculated. Outcomes were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards modeling, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Over 20 years, 740 patients with ICC had a median age of 66 years. Slightly more than half (n = 424, 57%) were non-referral center treated and 316 (43%) were referral center treated. Referral center treatment increased over time (odds ratio [OR] 1.03/year, p < 0.05). Referral center-treated patients had improved overall survival in all patients (median 9 vs. 4 months, p < 0.001), in the non-metastatic group (median 13 vs. 6 months, p < 0.001), and in patients not receiving liver resection (median 6 vs. 3 months, p < 0.05). On multivariable analysis, referral center-treated patients more often underwent chemotherapy, resection, or radiation (all p < 0.05). Increasing DRC (OR 0.98/20 km, p < 0.05) was independently associated with non-referral center treatment. CONCLUSION: Patients with ICC who are evaluated at a referral center are more likely to receive treatments associated with better oncologic outcomes, including patients who are not managed with hepatic resection. Increasing the DRC is associated with treatment at a non-referral center; interventions to facilitate referral, such as telemedicine, may lead to improved outcomes for patients with ICC in rural states.

The State of Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy and Its Sequencing among Current Therapeutic Options for Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) are the most common form of neuroendocrine neoplasia, but there is no current consensus for the sequencing of approved therapies, particularly with respect to peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). This comprehensive review evaluates the data supporting approved therapies for GEP-NETs and recommendations for therapeutic sequencing with a focus on how PRRT currently fits within sequencing algorithms. The current recommendations for PRRT sequencing restrict its use to metastatic, inoperable, progressive midgut NETs; however, this may change with emerging data to suggest that PRRT might be beneficial as neoadjuvant therapy for inoperable tumors, is more tolerable than other treatment modalities following first-line standard dose somatostatin analogs, and can be used as salvage therapy after disease relapse following prior successful cycles of PRRT. PRRT has also been shown to reduce tumor burden, improve quality of life, and prolong the time to disease progression in a broad spectrum of patients with GEP-NETs. As the various potential benefits of PRRT in GEP-NET therapy continues to expand, it is necessary to review and critically evaluate our treatment algorithms for GEP-NETs.

Surgical and oncologic outcomes following repeat hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastasis: Who benefits?

BACKGROUND: Resected colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) frequently recur intrahepatically. Selection criteria for repeat hepatectomy of recurrent CRLM are ill-defined. METHODS: We performed an institutional review of patients with recurrent CRLM undergoing repeat hepatectomy from 2003 to 19. Post-recurrence overall (rOS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: n = 147 experienced recurrent CRLM; 11% (n = 38) received repeat hepatectomy of which there was one Clavien-Dindo IIIa complication. Median rOS was 41 months; median RFS was 9 months. Improved rOS and RFS were independently associated with additional post-operative chemotherapy after repeat hepatectomy (HR 0.35 and 0.34, respectively); poor rOS with recurrent CRLM >3 cm (HR 4.4) and <12 months from first hepatectomy to recurrence (HR 4.8); poor RFS with ≥3 recurrence liver metastases (HR 2.8) (All P < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Repeat hepatectomy for recurrent CRLM can be performed safely. Worse survival following repeat hepatectomy is independently associated with >3 cm and ≥3 liver lesions at recurrence, and <12 months to recurrence. Additional post-operative chemotherapy after repeat hepatectomy is associated with improved outcomes.

Application of ASCO Value Framework to Treatment Advances in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Determination of the comparative efficacy of one therapy over another for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be challenging. Application of a recognized value framework to published studies could objectively compare the potential benefit across available therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An umbrella review of phase III trials for HCC therapies was performed. ASCO Value Framework Net Health Benefit Score version 2 (ASCO-NHB v2) scores, the primary analysis, and European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 scores, the secondary analysis, were computed using selected drug registration trials. Both scores were compared between drugs that were Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved by 2020 and those that were not. RESULTS: Of the 22 studies identified, nine were FDA-approved and 13 were not. Across 22 trials, the median overall survival (OS) was 9.2 months (range, 1.9-16.4 months), with a median gain of 0.35 month (range, 2.3-3.3 months). HCC therapies that were FDA-approved showed longer OS (median 10.7 v 7.9 months, P < .01) and higher ASCO NHB scores (+18.4 v -5.7 scores, P < .01). The median gain in OS was 2.2 months in the approved treatments compared with -0.3 months in the unapproved group, with no difference in progression-free survival between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The nine FDA-approved therapies for HCC have higher mean NHB score than those that were not FDA-approved. The application of ASCO-NHB v2 and other proposed value frameworks could examine data of future therapies for HCC through a patient-oriented approach.

Effect of Time to Surgery of Colorectal Liver Metastases on Survival.

PURPOSE: Resection of liver-only colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) with perioperative chemotherapy is potentially curative. Specific primary tumor and liver metastasis characteristics have been validated to estimate the risk of recurrence. We hypothesize that the time interval from diagnosis of CRLM to surgery, or time to surgery (TTS), is clinically prognostic. METHODS: Patients from a prospectively maintained institutional database at a Comprehensive Cancer Center from May 2003 to January 2018 were reviewed. Clinicopathologic, perioperative treatment, and TTS data were collected. TTS was categorized into short (< 3 months), intermediate (3-6 months), and long (> 6 months) intervals. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-one patients were identified. While overall survival (OS) was similar across TTS, postoperative overall survival (postoperative OS) of long TTS was associated with worse survival, 44 months (95% CI, 34-52) compared to short TTS, 59 months (95% CI, 43-79), and intermediate TTS, 63 months (95% CI, 52-108), both p < 0.01. With regard to long-term OS, intermediate TTS had 5-year OS of 59% and 8-year OS of 43% compared to long TTS (5-year OS 53% and 8-year OS 18%) and short TTS (5-year OS 54% and 8-year OS 29%). Long TTS was negatively associated with postoperative OS on multivariate analysis (HR 1.6, p < 0.01) when adjusting for resection margin, CRLM size, age, and use of postoperative chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Short and intermediate TTS had similar survival although patients with intermediate TTS may have better odds of long-term OS. While long TTS was associated with worse survival, likely due to higher disease burden, long-term survivors were still observed.

Correction to: Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for BCLC Stage C Hepatocellular Carcinoma Comparing Child-Pugh A Versus B7 Patients: Are the Outcomes Equivalent?

The name of one of the co-authors was slightly misspelled. Kristian Enestvedt is listed currently as "Kristian K. Enestvedt" and should be listed instead as "C. Kristian Enestvedt."

Yttrium-90 Radioembolization for BCLC Stage C Hepatocellular Carcinoma Comparing Child-Pugh A Versus B7 Patients: Are the Outcomes Equivalent?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate yttrium-90 (Y90) radioembolization outcomes across Child-Pugh scores in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2005 to December 2018, 106 consecutive patients with BCLC Stage C HCC who underwent Y90 radioembolization were retrospectively analyzed. Exclusion criteria included additional malignancy (n = 7), death unrelated to liver disease (n = 2), metastases (n = 2), or lack of follow-up data (n = 4). Ninety-one patients were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups with the log-rank test. Cox regression modeling was used to evaluate the prognostic factors for survival. RESULTS: Mean age was 63 years and 85.7% were male. HCV infection was the most common etiology of liver disease (58.2%). Sixty-four (70.3%) patients were Child-Pugh A, 19 (20.9%) patients were B7, and eight (8.8%) patients were B8-9. Median OS after radioembolization was 20.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.0-27.4], 6.0 (95% CI 4.4-7.6), and 5.5 (95% CI 2.5-8.5) months for Child-Pugh A, B7, and B8/9 groups, respectively (P < 0.001 for B7 vs. A; P = 0.537 for B7 vs. B8/9). The multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score (P < 0.001), Child-Pugh class (P = 0.005), tumor morphology pattern (P = 0.012), and Y90 delivery location (P = 0.020) were significant independent predictors of overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes from Y90 for BCLC C HCC for Child-Pugh B7 patients were equivalent to B8/9 patients and significantly worse compared to Child-Pugh A patients. Although further research is warranted, these results suggest continued cautious patient selection for radioembolization in advanced HCC.